B RAMASUBBA REDDY Vs. R

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These writ petitions are disposed of by a common judgment as the issue involved is common to all the writ petitions.

(2.) The petitioners in W.P.No. 16957/96 are bona fide purchasers of plots made in Acs. 9.00 of land situated in Survey No. 91 of Bowenpally Village, Rangareddy District known as 'Vadlavani Bhavi'. The said Vadlavani Bhavi was plotted out in the year 1970 after obtaining permission from the Gram Panchayat. The purchases were made between 27-11 -1993 to 23-5-1-996. The first petitioner is the Society known as 'Shiva Enclave Welfare Society'. The Second petitioner is one of the members of the Society. The vendors of the petitioners are the Legal representatives of Sri Mustafa Shareif, Sri Veera Reddy and Malla Reddy respondents 6 to 11. At the time of purchase of these plots there were temporary structures in various plots. After purchasing the plots, 35 of them have constructed their houses. They have obtained electricity connection, telephone connection etc. In some of the plots, construction is in progress and in rest of the plots compound walls were constructed. The petitioners came to know that in a long standing litigation between respondents 6 to 11 and respondents 3 to 5, patta was granted in favour of respondents 3 to 5 on payment of Rs. 1,450/- on 16-8-96 in respect of Acs. 9.00 of land in S.No. 91 of Bowenpally known as.Vadlavani Bhavi. The petitioners were not aware of the litigation between respondents 6 to 11 and 3 to 5 and neither respondents 6 to 11 nor respondents 3 to 5 Brought to their notice the litigation pending between them. Though the plots were made and sold to the petitioners and construction was carried on by the petitioners, at no point of time the litigation pending between them was brought to their notice nor did they issue any notice saying that they should not proceed with the construction in view of the litigation pending between them. Under those circumstances, the first respondent (M.R.O.)cannot deliver possession of the property to respondents 3 to 5 without paying the cost of the improvements made by the petitioners. In the alternative, the petitioners should be permitted to pay the market value of the land to respondents 3 to 5 and retain the land.

(3.) In W.P.Nos. 21783/96; 21878/96; 22020/96 and 21785/96 the petitioners are 10, 18, 16, and 9 in number. They are all purchasers of the plots in Survey No.91 known as Vadlavani Bhavi,. Bowenpalli Village. The petitions contend that they have purchased these lands from the ostensible owners, namely, respondents 6 to 11. They being bonafide purchasers in good faith from the ostensible owner, they have perfected theif title and their title prevail over the title of respondents 3 to 5 and therefore, the possession cannot be delivered to respondents 3 to 5.